Re: Proposed resolution of HRRI/IRI discussion

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Martin Duerst writes:

> At 06:12 07/11/06, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>
>>I have one small request for a reduction of ambiguity in section 7.2
>>of your draft (for which many thanks).  Since section 7.3 actually in
>>one way or another lists _all_ characters not allowed in IRIs,
>>including those not allowed in LEIRIs either, we would suggest
>>
>> "each character not allowed in an IRI"
>>
>>  =---->
>>
>> "each character allowed in a LEIRI but not allowed in an IRI"
>
> I have applied this edit to my local editing copy, but because
> the original phrase is actually
>    "each character not allowed in an IRI reference"
> the new wording is
>    "each character allowed in a Legacy Extended IRI reference but
>     not allowed in an IRI reference"

Right, thanks.

> Maybe something more explicit about the fact that Legacy extended IRIs
> and Legacy Extended IRI references work in parallel is necessary?

Yes, that would probably be a good idea.

One further issue has arisen in discussion within the XML Core WG:  

In section 6.2 of your draft, we find
 
    Intermediate software interfaces between IRI-capable components
    and URI-only components MUST map the IRIs per Section 3.1, when
    transferring from IRI-capable to URI-only components.  This
    mapping SHOULD be applied as late as possible.  It SHOULD NOT be
    applied between components that are known to be able to handle
    IRIs.

The Core WG likes that, and we wonder if there could be something 
like that for LEIRIs as well.  Would you consider adding an analogy of
that prose to section 7?

ht
- -- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHQWk0kjnJixAXWBoRApqtAJ41+AjkBNl9YcZeNR0zXQ2x6v/t2gCbB8QM
DfVUDpawY53bhiqkCtzAzTQ=
=7oKG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 14:24:27 UTC